F 912 
.M2R8 







^ V ^ ' * »' o 









^^ 



^y(.^^ . "V^ ^ 



" <= , "^O 






^^ , 






•\o^^ 



^•^ ^ 



-^^0^ 

.^^°- 



o V 

^^ 



^-^ 












■I'^^l,^.- ,*'' "'^ 








< o 










" <= » '^O . 



A 



.-Jv' 



.'Jv 






.0' -o 






^^ y'r'm^^ ^ /^M^ .^^ :^ -^^ 






'-"' ^^ 4.^^ 



>, 
O 









^^O 



^ v^ 









;;:#M-^ "^ c*' -*>?#-■• ^ 













'^ .v>>i2*^^ .>^ ^^ .^A^^^^ t<> /^ .^>)^^ 



^; 












'^<^ <.--^-^-''/ V»^/ ^v^?:V:-v 



"^^^ 



> 



ry .^ 



V 



\' 



'Z- 






t?*. 



^ ,^' :>:M^^ '^..s^^ ^^mm, ^ sx^' 



c 




=-^ 






.V-^. 



<.y ' '^"JTo 






A^ 



V-^'. 












■^^ ^'4*^^.^ '''^. ^<c 



0^ 






-^^0^ 



,^ 



MOUNT McKINLEY 



ITS BEARIN(; ON THE 



POLAR CONTROVERSY 



A brief review of attempts — successful and otherwise — to 

reach the Top of the Continent and a few 

logical deductions therefrom 



•BY — 



ERNEST C. ROST 

Member National Ge<ii;rapliic Society 



Copyrii;lit 19 14, 
By E. C. ROST, 
New York. 



©CI.A397082 

1 m 



'V<->:> ( 



OTHER WORKS BY THE AUTHOR. 



vSantiiiyo Leslie's, 1899 

First Ma.vor of Havana 'Leslie's, 1899 

Revolt in Panay and Celiu Leslie's, 19()0 

Life in the Far-Off Philippines Leslie's, 1900 

General Bates as a Diplomat Leslie's, 1900 

Business Interest in Manila Leslie's, 1900 

An Artist's Strange Fxperiences in the h'ar h'.ast Leslie's, 1900 

Hints for Americans — Transportation in Si>iith Anu'rica. . Sci. Am., 1902 

The Famous Oroya Railroad Sci. Am., 1902 

Mount Pelee in Eruption Sci. Am., 1902 

Punta Arenas : Most Southerly Town in the World. .Sci. Am. Sup., 1902 
Queer Craft of the Philippines, China and vSouth America. Sci. Am., 1902 

Pizarro. h'ounder of Peru Sci. Am., 1902 

Treaty of Jolo Sci. Am., 1904 

Lakes Titicaca, Saracocha and Cachipascana, or Xaxigation on an 

Ocean Steamer 13,000 feet ahove Sea Level Har])er's Mag., 190;i 

Guam and Its Governor Munsey's, 1900 

Highest of All Railroads World's Work, 1902 

Did An American Discover the Xorth Pole? A. H. Review, 1914 

Peary's I{ndorsement of Dr. Cook and Henson's Opinion of Same, 

A. H. Review, 1914 
Scientific and Practical Value of Polar Exploration. .A. H. Review, 1914 

Side Lights on Mount McKinley A. H. Review, 1914 

The Sultan of Moro Century Mag., 1913 



MOUNT McKlNLEY 

ITS BEARING ON THE 

POLAR CONTROVERSY 



During the last decade six attempts have been made 
to reach North America's highest peak — the summit of 
Mount McKinley. Of these the second, third and sixth 
were successful. 

In 1903 Dr. Frederick A. Cook, with three companions, 
Ralph Shainwald, Robert Dunn and Fred Printz, made his 
first and unsuccessful attempt. 

Three years later, in 1906, Dr. Cook organized and 
led a party of ten, including Belmore Browne and.Hers- 
chel C. Parker, to the base of the mountain, but one after 
another of the party dropped out, until only Dr. Cook and 
his packer, Edward Barrill, were left. These two men, 
with courage undaunted by apparently insurmountable 
obstacles, continued the trip and finally succeeded, on 
September 16th, 1906, in attaining the "top of the conti- 
nent." The weather was favorable, the temperature — 16 
deg. F., the air at the top clear, and Doctor Cook secured 
a splendid photograph of the summit, with his companion, 
Barrill, holding the American flag on the highest point 
of the North American continent, an altitude of 20,390 
feet. Of this photograph more later. (See page 28.) 

In 1910 the Lloyd expedition, comprising a party of 
three men, ascended the southern peak of the mountain, 
and not content with this achievement, immediately there- 
after carried a flagstaff to a height of 20,000 feet on the 
northern peak, and planted it there so firmly that it was 
still plainly visible in 1913. 

The same year (1910) Belmore Browne and the 
pseudo-Professor Parker made a trip to Alaska for the 



8 

nominal purpose of climbing Mount McKinley, but turned 
back at a height of 10,300 feet. In 1912 they made an- 
other attempt which they claimed was almost successful. 

The latest expedition, that of Dr. Hudson Stuck, Arch- 
deacon of the Yukon, attained the summit on June 7th, 
1913, having followed a route which, when near the top, 
gradually merged with that which Dr. Cook and Barrill 
traversed seven years previously. Dr. Stuck's first narra- 
tive was published in Scribner's Magazine of November, 
1913. 

The ascent of Mount McKinley, while an admittedly 
difficult feat, was inevitable sooner or later by some in- 
trepid explorer. In 1906 and 1907 Dr. Frederick A. Cook 
was universally accepted as the first man to set foot on 
the "Top of the Continent," as was shown by the follow- 
ing announcement copied from page 714 of the National 
Geographic Magazine for December, 1906: 

"December 15, Annual Banquet. The New Wil- 
lard. The guests of the evening will include 

* * * Commander Robert E. Peary and Mrs. 
Peary ; Mr. Morris K. Jesup, of New York, Presi- 
dent of the Peary Arctic Club, and Mrs. Jesup ; 

* * * Dr. Frederick A. Cook ivho has been the 
fiist to ascend Mount McKinleij." 

The January, 1907, number of the National Geographic 
Magazine, giving a detailed account of the above-men- 
tioned dinner, contains the following remarks by Alex- 
ander Graham Bell, Contributing Editor of the National 
Geographic Magazine and member of the Board of Man- 
agers of the National Geographic Society: 

"I have been asked to say a few words about a 
man who must be known, by name, at least, to 
all of us, Dr. Frederick A. Cook, President of the 
Explorers Club, New York. 

We have with us and are glad to welcome Com- 
mander Peary of the Arctic regions, but in Dr. 
Cook we have one of the few Americans, if not the 
only American, who has explored both extremes of 
the world, the Arctic and the Antarctic regions. 
And now he has been to the top of the American 



continent, and therefore to the top of the world; 
and tonight I hope Dr. Frederick Cook will tell us 
something about Mount McKinley." 

Doubtless, today Dr. Frederick A. Cook would hold un- 
disputed title of the first Conciueror of this Monarch of 
North American Peaks had it not seemed desirable to his 
opponents in the Polar controversy to cast a shadow of 
doubt on his mountaineering feat, in the hope to there- 
by discredit his discovery of the North Pole. To this end 
methods were employed which will not bear the search- 
light of honest investigation. 

A campaign of dishonor was inaugurated, the initial 
step in which was the perjured affidavit made by Edward 
Barrill, for which he was promised $25,000 and was paid 
$1,500, at the time the affidavit was made. For three 
years Barrill had proudly boasted to friends and strangers 
alike of how he and Dr. Cook had climbed Mount Mc- 
Kinley. But he was a man of moderate means, with a 
family, and needed money. However, he refused mod- 
erately large amounts, and it was not until the proffered 
bribe was increased to $25,000 that he finally consented 
to make the false affidavit. This valuable (?) document 
in the hands of the Peary interests, served as a news- 
paper sensation for a time, and no doubt had weight with 
that portion of the public which allows the press bureaus 
to think for it; but reasoning people argued that an affi- 
davit purchased from a self-confessed liar, was worth 
but little, pro or con. Other steps must be taken. Other 
steps ive)-e taken. 

Mr. Peary's press agent ofi"ered $3,000 and Lawyer 
J. M. Ashton, of Tacoma, Washington, a like amount 
towards financing an expedition to climb Mount McKin- 
ley in 1910. To this offer "Professor" H. C. Parker and 
Belmore Browne, both "quitters" from Dr. Cook's 1906 
expedition, responded. J. A. MacDonald, who was in the 
foot-hills of Mount McKinley when Dr. Cook's party 
landed at the headwaters of the Yentna River, writes 
of this same "Professor" as follows : 

"Dr. Parker should be the last one to say any- 
thing about mountain climbing, or anything where 



10 



it takes a man and pluck to accomplish results — 
good results — as he showed himself to be the rank- 
est kind of a tenderfoot while in the foothills of Mt. 
McKinley, and was the laughing stock of the coun- 
try. Mt. McKinley and the country around there 
was too rough for him. He got 'cold feet' and 
started back for the States, before he had even 
seen much of the country around there." 

This choice combination went to Alaska and engaged 
in mining and hunting for a time in the foothills of 
Mount McKinley. When the season was well advanced 
they started up the northeast side of the mountain, but 
were turned back by rotten ice ; after this futile attempt 
they ascended to a height of 10,300 feet on the south side 
and returned with a number of photographs and sketches, 
some of which were afterwards published by Belmore 
Browne in magazine articles and later in his book : "The 
Conquest of Mount McKinley." (See page 29.) In 
Parker's account of the 1910 expedition he claimed that 

"The northeast ridge, the one used by Dr. Cook 
(north of Ruth Glacier) was absolutely insur- 
mountable." 

But in 1912 Messrs. Browne and Parker made yet an- 
other attempt to scale the mountain — again financed by 
the Peary interests — and this time "Professor" Parker 
found reason for a change of thought regarding the route 
to the top, for of this trip he said : 

"The northeast ridge is the only feasible ridge, 
and whoever goes up will follow in my footsteps." 

Parker was advised to take this route by Engineer R. 
C. Bates, United States Revenue Inspector of Mines, who 
in 1911 with a party of two explored the mountain, and 
selected the northeast ridge as the only feasible route to 
the top. lie ascended to 11,000 feet and told the exploit 
to the Parker party, who took the same route, and with 
an able guide ascended nearly to the summit. Of this 
trip the Associated Press said that its principal result 



11 



was to show that the northeast ridge was climbable. In 
1913 Hudson Stuck ascended by the Muldrow glacier and 
the northeast ridge. 

Dr. Cook's judgment in his selection of the northeast 
ridge as his route to the top was thus vindicated by three 
different parties, among them the men who started out 
to discredit him. 

* * * 

In addition to various magazine articles by different 
explorers, three books have been published, describing 
the ascent of Mount McKinley ; one, "To the Top of the 
Continent," by Dr. Frederick A. Cook, relating the history 
of his first attempt and his later success ; another by Bel- 
more Browne, "The Conquest of Mount McKinley," which 
gives a brief outline of his trip with Dr. Cook in 1906, 
an account of his expedition with "Professor" Parker 
in 1910 ; also the story of his near-ascent in 1912. The 
third and latest book is "The Ascent of Denali (Mount 
McKinley)," by Hudson Stuck, D. D., Archdeacon of the 
Yukon. 

The interest in Mr. Browne's book centers in Chapter 
X, which he calls "The End of the Polar Controversy"; 
and Chapter XXVI, in which he relates the story of his 
last vain struggle to reach the actual summit. 

In Chapter XXVI, Mr. Browne describes in detail the 
ascent to an altitude of 19,300 feet, at which point they 
encountered a severe blizzard. Although they persevered 
for a time and managed to proceed a short distance 
higher, the blinding storm rendered it impossible for 
them to distinguish objects, or even read the dials of their 
barometers; and they were eventually forced to turn back 
without reaching the summit. Mr. Browne says, on page 
346: 

«* * * -^g Y^Q^^ j-jQ^ stood on the top." 

Belmore Browne asserts that Dr. Cook's photograph 
of the summit of Mount McKinley is not a photograph 
of the summit, but was taken in the foothills, 20 miles 
from McKinley's highest peak. He also asserts that 



12 



his own picture of what he calls the "Fake Peak" was 
taken at the same spot as was Dr. Cook's photograph, 
and therefore he considers it a "conviction" of Dr. Cook. 
In Chapter X, opposite page 122, Mr. Browne pub- 
lishes a picture, underneath which appears the following 
legend : 

"The author photographing the Fake Peak. 
Tucker standing where Barrill stood. This view 
inchiding the author is used for a special reason. 
As short a time ago as March, 1913, a Geographer 
accused the author of painting (by hand) the views 
of this peak with which we convicted Dr. Cook !" 
(Photo by H. C. Parker.) | See page 29. | 

Mr. Browne does not take his readers into his confi- 
dence sufficiently to mention the name of the "Geogra- 
pher" who made the above accusation — because the name 
would stand for an authority beyond dispute. Even a 
twelve-year-old boy who has spent his holidays roaming 
about with a kodak can see at a glance that the picture 
with which Mr. Browne claims he "convicted Dr. Cook" 
is not a photograph per se, but a drawing made over 
a photograph. This picture certainly bears conviction of 
fraud but not of Dr. Cook. On this point Mr. Browne 
is caught in his own trap and "convicted" by his own 
work. He is a clever artist indeed, but not so clever that 
he can disguise a combination photograph-drawing-paint- 
ing successfully enough to deceive even an amateur 
photographer, to say nothing of an expert professional. 
As a matter of fact, one need be neither amateur nor 
professional — just plain layman — to discern the glaring 
differences between Mr. Belmore Browne's composite pic- 
ture of the so-called "Fake Peak" and Dr. Cook's bona 
fide photograph of the summit. 

Since Mr. Browne admits that: 

"We had not stood on the top" 
and since he further admits that he was unable to see 



13 



anything of the mountain higher than a point of a thou- 
sand feet altitude below the summit, he is not in a posi- 
tion to say what the summit looks like or whether or not 
Dr. Cook's photograph is a true picture of the highest 
point. 

Personally, in my work as a magazine writer and spe- 
cial correspondent for various publications, I have had 
much experience in photographic work at high altitudes; 
my work in this line has been highly approved by the 
heads of several departments of our government, and 
some of it has been accepted for use in official publica- 
tions; I therefore am competent to make the unqualified 
statement that Dr. Cook presents a photograph from Na- 
ture, while Belmore Browne's picture is obviously faked. 
[See page 31. | 

Although Mr. Browne prints under his picture which 
he calls the "Fake Peak" the words: "Photo by H. C. 
Parker," his memory apparently slipped a cog at this 
point, for on page 121 he writes: 

'<* * * While we stood there lost in thought 
of the dramatic side of our discovery. Professor 
Parke)- (not Tucker) walked to the top of the rock 
at the point where Barrill had posed when Dr. Cook 
exposed the negative. His figure completed the 
picture." 

The above is onlj^ one more proof of Mr. Browne's in- 
accurate and careless statements. 

In his story of his 1912 expedition, on pages 340 and 
341, Mr. Browne says: 

"Report has it that the Lloyd Mount McKinley 
party had reached this peak or one of its northern 
shoulders and there raised a pole above a pile of 
rocks * * * Qj^ ^Y\e last days close to the 
southern summit every rock and snow slope of 
that approach had come into the field of our power- 
ful binoculars. We not only saw no sign of a flag- 
pole but it is our concerted opinion that the North- 
ern Peak is more inaccessible than its higher south- 
ern sister." 

A year later Archdeacon Stuck wrote in Scribner's 
Magazine for November, 1913 : 



14 



"All at once Walter cried out, 'I see the flag- 
staff!' eagerly pointing to the rocky peak nearest 
the summit * * * Whipping out the field- 
glasses, one by one we all looked and all saw it 
distinctly, standing out against the sky. Through 
the glasses it rose sturdy and strong, one side cov- 
ered with crusted snow ; and we were greatly re- 
joiced that we could carry down confirmation of 
the matter." 

While Archdeacon Stuck, in November, 1913, thus di- 
rectly contradicted the statement of Belmore Browne, at 
the same time, in word and illustration, he corroborated 
Dr. Cook's account of his ascent to the summit, published 
six years earlier. This corroboration was doubly strik- 
ing, because it was unconscious and unintentional. Note 
the similarity in the following parallel columns : 



On page 218 of "To the 
Top of the Continent," Dr. 
Cook says : 

"As we dragged ourselves 
out of this icy ditch of ter- 
rors (in the northeast 
ridge) we were able to see 
that we had passed the bar- 
riers to the ascent. The 
slopes above were easy, 
safe and connected, but the 
bigness of the mountain 
was more and more appar- 
ent as we rose above the 
clouds. The task enlarged 
with the ascent * * * Soon 
after noon we swung from 
the Arete easterly to the 
glacier. The snow was 
hard and the slope such 
that but little step cutting 
was now necessary. Along 
the glacier to the gathering 
basin near the summit the 
prospective route rose in 
easy slants to our goal." 



On page 544 of Scrib- 
ner's Magazine for Novem- 
b e r , 1913, Archdeacon 
Stuck says: 

"With the exception of 
this ridge (the northeast 
ridge) Denali (Mt. McKin- 
ley) is not a mountain that 
presents any special diffi- 
culties of a technical kind. 
Its difficulties lie in its re- 
moteness, its size, the great 
distances of snow and ice 
its climbing must include 
the passage of * * * But 
the northeast ridge in its 
present condition adds all 
of sensation and danger 
that any man could desire." 



15 



On page 225 Dr. Cook 

says : 

"During the frequent 
breathing spells we exam- 
ined the upper reaches of 
the mountain. We had seen 
the summit from various 
sides, but we were not pre- 
pared for the surprise of 
the great spread of surface. 
From below the apex ap- 
pears like a single peak 
with gradual slopes. From 
the northern foothills we 
had previously discovered 
two distinct peaks. But 
now, from the upper slopes, 
we saw that there were sev- 
eral miniature ranges run- 
ning up to two main peaks, 
about two miles apart. To 
the west a ridge with a sad- 
dle, to the east a similar 
ridge, with one main peak 
to the southeast. This peak 
was the highest point and 
to it we aimed to take our 
weary spirits." 

Of the final climb to the 
top Dr. Cook wrote on 
pages 230 and 231 : 



Note Archdeacon Stuck's 
narrative, page 548: 

"At last the crest of the 
ridge was reached and we 
stood well above the two 
peaks which rise at the ends 
of the horseshoe. We had 
been aware for some time 
that we were above the 
North Peak for its apex had 
been like an index as we 
rose, and we had paused 
and noted the spot where 
we seemed level with it. 
But still there stretched 
ahead of us and perhaps 
one hundred feet above us, 
another small ridge with 
a pair of haycock summits. 
This is the real top of De- 
nali (Mt. McKinley). From 
below it merges indistin- 
guishably, even on a clear 
day, with the crest of the 
horseshoe ridge with which 
it is parallel, but it is not 
a part of it, but a culminat- 
ing ridge beyond it." 

Archdeacon Stuck's ex- 
perience is given on pages 
548 and 549 of Scribner's: 



"The last few hundred 
feet of the ascent so reduced 
our physical powers that we 
dropped onto the snow, 
completely exhausted, gasp- 
ing for breath. We puffed 
and puffed, and after a 
while the sickening thump 
under the left fifth rib be- 
came less noticeable. Breath 
came and went easier, and 
then the call of the top was 



"The writer's shortness 
of breath became more and 
more distressing as he rose 
* =^ * Yet a few m.oments' 
rest recovered him as com- 
pletely as ever, to struggle 
on another twenty or thir- 
- paces, and to sink gasp- 
ing on the snow again. 
M: * * rpj^g j^^^ man on the 

rope, in his enthusiasm and 
excitement somewhat over- 



16 

again uppermost * * Just passing his narrow wind 
below the summit we drop- margin, had almost to be 
ped over an icy shelf on the hauled up the few final feet, 
verge of collapse. After a and lost consciousness for 
few moments we gathered a moment, as he fell upon 
breath and courage and the floor of the little basin 
then for the last stage the that occupies the summit." 
life line tightened with a 
nervous pull. We edged up 
along a steep snowy ridge 
and over the heaven- 
scraped granite to the top! 
AT LAST! The soul stir- 
ring task was crowned with 
victory, the TOP of the 
Continent was under our 
feet." 

The only deduction to be made from these two narra- 
tives is a confirmation of Dr. Cook's story by Archdea- 
con Stuck. This point was forcibly expressed by Sena- 
tor Miles Poindexter in his remarks on the floor of the 
Senate April 30, 1914. I quote from the Congressional 
Record of that date: 

"Previous to the so-called polar controversy 
every one who had ever been associated with Cook 
in exploring expeditions spoke well of his char- 
acter and ability. When the polar controversy 
arose and grew bitter an attempt was made to dis- 
credit Cook by attacking his account of the ascent 
of Mount McKinley. In this matter, as in the 
polar trip. Dr. Cook published an account of his 
explorations. In Harper's Monthly Magazine for 
May, 1907, he described the physical conditions 
and appearances of the ascent and the summit 
of McKinley. This was published in book form 
in 1908. Previous to these publications no one had 
ever described the summit of McKinley. No one 
claimed to know its conditions or appearances. 
He described minutely the 'northeast ridge,' its 
sharp summit, and the route by it to the extreme 
summit of the mountain ; the great upstanding 
granite rocks at the point of approach to the Me- 
dian Glacier, or Grand Basin, lying between the 
north and south peaks of the extreme summit ; the 



1 



two summit peaks themselves ; and that the south 
peak is the higher of the two. No one had ever 
stated these facts before Dr. Cook's publication 
of them. No one ever claimed to know them be- 
fore Cook's ascent of the mountain. They coulci 
only be ascertained by an ascent of the mountain. 

In Scribner's Magazine for November, 191o, 
Archdeacon Hudson Stuck publishes an account 
of his own subsequent ascent of the mountain. 
In it he corroborates in every material feature 
Cook's previously published account of the sharp 
backbone of the northeast ridge ; the difficulties 
of its ascent; the great granite rocks at the en- 
trance to the Grand Basin; the Median Glacier; 
the north and south peaks ; and that the south 
peak is the higher. 

It is difficult to explain Dr. Cook's previously 
published accurate description of these things, the 
first ever given, except by admitting his actual 
ascent of the mountain's summit." 

The fact that Archdeacon Stuck failed to bring back 
with him the brass tube left by Dr. Cook proves nothing. 
In common with other glacial peaks, the summit of Mount 
McKinley is at times windswept, "heaven-scraped gran- 
ite" ; at other times covered with a great depth of snow. 
When Archdeacon Stuck made the ascent in June, se^/en 
years after Dr. Cook's conquest of the mountain in Sep- 
tember, the summit was covered with snow. This alone, 
irrespective of the other natural changes which are con- 
stantly taking place in a glacial summit, would account 
for Archdeacon Stuck's failure to find Dr. Cook's rec- 
ords, even if he had looked for them, which apparently 
he did not do. 

Although Stuck's first story of his ascent is fairly en- 
tertaining, some of his statements were sharply criticised 
by other writers and travelers. Under date of December 
30, 1913, the noted geographical historian, Edwin Swift 
Balch, in an open letter to the New York Sun, said : 

(New York Sun of December 31, 1913.) 
K2 
"To THE Editor of The Sun — Sir: 

In the November Scribner's Magazine, page 552, 



18 

Archdeacon Stuck makes the following statements : 
'The English geographers prefer K2, the sur- 
veyor's designation of the second highest peak 
of the Himalayas, which the Duke of the Abruzzi 
climbed in 1909, the highest point ever reached 
by man.' 

This will undoubtedly be news to all mountain 
climbers and geographers, and especially to the 
Duke of the Abruzzi himself, to whom the Arch- 
deacon should cable at once the glad tidings." 
(Signed) Edwin Swift Balch. 

To this Archdeacon Stuck replied, in the New York 
Sun of January 3, 1914 : 

K2 

"To THE Editor of The Sun — Sir: 

I have waited more than two months for Mr. 
Edwin Swift Balch's letter, and am glad that he 
has at length discovered my mistake. I discovered 
it myself weeks before the article was published 
in Scribner's Magazine, but not in time to get the 
correction made. The annoying thing about it is 
that K2 and the Duke of the Abruzzi were a mere 
flourish of embellishment to show how much I 
knew about mountain climbing, dragged in by the 
scruff of their necks, so to speak. * * *" 
(Signed) Hudson Stuck, 

Archdeacon of the Yukon. 

So much for the magazine article. 

In February, 1914, Archdeacon Stuck published his 
book : "The Ascent of Denali (Mount McKinley) ," Charles 
Scribner's Sons, New York, in which he makes copious 
and elaborate additions to, as well as important omissions 
from his original narrative, with apparently but one ob- 
ject in mind — to discredit Dr. Cook. 

Why this sudden change of attitude? What influence 
— flnancial or otherwise — was brought to bear on the 
reverend gentleman to induce him to make such patheti- 
cally strenuous — though futile — eff"orts to discredit this 
straightforward, truthful account of one brother ex- 
plorer — Dr. Cook — and bolster up the tottering structure 
of flimsy falsehoods erected by another — Belmore 



19 



Browne? The writer does not attempt to answer this 
inquiry, though the inference is plain. It must also be 
remembered that this pious missionary, in his ambition 
to prove himself the first to stand on the top of the Con- 
tinent, fails to credit Lloyd with his ascent of the south- 
ern (the higher) peak. 

The dedication of the book to Sir Martin Conway seems 
a little presumptuous on the part of the author, as there 
is small community of achievement between one of the 
world's greatest travelers, climbers and explorers, and 
the itinerant Alaskan preacher who was literally dragcjed 
to the culmination of his highest climb by his sturdy com- 
panions. 

Stuck's carelessness in detail is plainly shown in his 
attempted Scriptural quotations. Although a "D. D." 
and an Archdeacon, presumably (?) familiar with his 
Bible, neither of the two quotations from the Psalms on 
page 110, nor the one on page 115, nor the one from 
Matthew on page xiii (Preface) is correct. (See Psalm 
148, verse 8 ; Psalm 65, verse 6 ; Psalm 50, verse 1 ; and 
Matthew 12, verse 34.) 

On page xiii (Preface) Dr. Stuck says he is "no pro- 
fessed explorer or climber or 'scientist,' but a missionary, 
and of these matters an amateur only." If inaccurate 
in his quotation of the most familiar lines from the Text 
Book of his chosen profession, what dependence can we 
place on his observations and conclusions in a field where 
he is admittedly a novice, but nevertheless considers him- 
self competent to criticise and condemn an experienced 
explorer? 

As already noted. Archdeacon Stuck in his magazine 
article directly contradicted Belmore Browne's statement 
relative to the flagstaff planted on the North Peak by 
the Lloyd party. In his book he attempts to reconcile 
this discrepancy by saying, on page 172: 

"It (the flagstaff") is, indeed, only just visible 
with the naked eye from certain points on the 
upper glacier and quite invisible at any lower or 
more distant point." 



20 
And again on page 173 : 

"It would never be seen with the naked eye save 
by those who were intently searching for it." 

This friendly effort to put Messrs. Browne and Parker 
right on the subject fails of its purpose, however, for Mr. 
Browne says in his book on pages 340 and 341, as pre- 
viously quoted: 

"Every rock and snow slope of that approach 
had come into the field of our powerful binoculars. 
We * * * gr^^ j^Q sign of a flag-pole," etc. 

Mr. Browne was certainly "intently searching for it," 
and 7iot with "the naked eye." Try again, Brother Stuck! 

Stuck reports that he was unable to find Parker's ther- 
mometer which he had left "in a crevice on the highest 
rock of the main ridge" (see page 349 of "The Conquest 
of Mount McKinley"), as quoted by Stuck, "in a crack 
on the west side of the last boulder of the northeast ridge." 
Stuck accounts for his failure to find the thermometer 
by saying, on page 120, when referring to his own rec- 
ord, which was left much lower than Parker's thermome- 
ter: 

"There would, however, have been little use in 
leaving it amid the boulders where we hunted un- 
successfully for Professor Parker's instrument." 



Also on page 119 he says: 



"Above, we had not found any distinctive place 
in which a record could be deposited with the as- 
surance that it would be found bv anyone seeking 
it." 

Is it not inconsistent to lay great stress on the fact that 
Dr. Cook's record, left in a brass tube a few feet below 
the summit, has not been found? 

It is on pages 161 to 166, inclusive, however, that Arch- 
deacon Stuck makes his most direct attack on Dr. Cook's 
veracity. If veracity is to be questioned, however, it is 



■21 



not that of Dr. Cook in his narrative, but that of Stuck 
in his criticism. It is irritating- to the point of exaspera- 
tion to find a man whose profession lends weight to his 
unsupported word, guilty of such inaccuracies and worse, 
in his attempt to deny the achievement of a fellow trav- 
eler. On page 165 Stuck says: 

"Dr. Cook talks about 'the heaven-scraped gran- 
ite of the top' and 'the dazzling whiteness of the 
frosted granite blocks' and prints a photograph 
of the top showing granite slabs. There is no rock 
of any kind on the South (the higher) Peak above 
nineteen thousand feet. The last one thousand five 
hundred feet of the mountain is all permanent 
snow and ice." 

On page 233 of "To the Top of the Continent," Dr. 
Cook mentions as most impressive 

"the curious low dark sky, the dazzling bi-igJityie.'iS 
(not whitoie.'^s) of the frosted granite blocks," 
etc. 

and his photograph of the summit certainly shows rock. 
Archdeacon Stuck's statement that "There is no rock 
of any kind above nineteen thousand feet" is especially 
interesting, for opposite page 102 of his book he shows 
a picture of 

"Denali's Wife from the summit of Denali," 

in which bare, "Heaven-scraped" granite is plainly 
shown but a short distance from the summit of Denali 
(Mount McKinley). 

Apparently a mis-statement on the part of someone — 
but not Dr. Cook. 

Again Stuck says of Dr. Cook (page 165) : 

"In his account of the view from the summit 
he speaks of 'the ice-blink caused by the extensive 
glacial sheets north of the Saint Elias group,' 



22 



which would surely be out of the range of any 
possible vision, but does not mention at all the 
master sight that bursts upon the eye when the 
summit is actually gained — the great mass of 
'Denali's Wife,' or Mount Foraker filling all the 
middle distance." 

1. Dr. Cook does not "in his account of the view from 
the summit" speak of the ice-blink, etc. On page 229 of 
his book he writes : 



<<* * * ^g started for the culminating peak 
(2000 feet above). The sun soon rose far above 
the green lowland beyond Mount Hayes and moved 
toward the ice-blink caused by the extensive glacial 
sheets north of the St. Elias group." 

(It is certainly difficult for Archdeacon Stuck to correctly 
quote miiithing) . 

2. In his description of the summit Dr. Cook says: 

"Fifty thousand square miles of our arctic won- 
derland was spread out under our enlarged horizon, 
but we could see it only in sections. Various trains 
of morning clouds screened the lowlands and en- 
twined the lesser peaks." 

On page 104 Stuck writes regarding the view from 
the summit: 

"Only once, perhaps, in any lifetime is such 
vision granted. Not often in the summer time 
does Denali completely unveil himself and dismiss 
the clouds from all the earth beneath." 

And again on pages 107-108 : 

"In all human probability I would never climb 
that mountain again ; yet if I climbed it a score 
more times I would never be likely to repeat such 
vision. Commonly, only for a few hours at a time, 
never for more than a few days at a time, save in 
the dead of winter when climbing is out of the 



O'i 



question, does Denali completely unveil himself 
and dismiss the clouds from all the earth beneath 
him * * * As the needle turns to the mag- 
net, so the clouds find an irresistible attraction in 
this great mountain mass." 

Does not a thoughtful person find in the above a logical 
reason for Dr. Cook's failure to report the "master sight" 
of Denali's Wife (Mount Foraker) ? 

But as previously stated, Archdeacon Stuck's strongest 
criticism of Dr. Cook's picture of the summit is the fact 
that his photograph shows rock and that he mentions 
"heaven-scraped granite" in his description, while Stuck 
claims there is no rock of any kind on the highest peak 
within 1500 feet of the summit. Yet opposite page 102 of 
Stuck's book is a fine photogravure picture, taken from 
the summit by Stuck himself, which plainly shows "gran- 
ite slabs." 

Archdeacon Stuck attempts to discredit Dr. Cook's 
ascent of the mountain by claiming that Cook's picture 
of the summit shows rock where he (Stuck) claims none 
exists. How then, does Stuck explain the "granite slabs" 
in his own picture of the summit? 

And this is the man — himself not an American — who 
makes an impassioned appeal in his book for the removal 
of the name of an honored, martyred President of the 
United States from the highest mountain on the North 
American continent, situated on United States territory; 
and the placing thereon of the name "Denali," which this 
itinerant circuit rider claims is the Indian name. As 
a matter of fact the name "Denali" is unknown among 
the Alaskan Indians except by one small tribe. Other 
tribes had other designations for it ; but in 1896 the moun- 
tain was "discovered" by W. A. Dickey and by him named 
"Mount McKinley." Let the name of McKinley stand, 

The illustrations on pp. 28 and 29 are photographic re- 
productions of Dr. Cook's "Summit of Mount McKinley" 
("To the Top of the Continent" facing page 226) ; and 
of Belmore Browne's "Fake Peak" ("The Conquest of 



24 

Mount McKinley" facing page 122), which is Mr. 
Browne's "star" picture and is considered by him his 
strongest argument against Dr. Cook. Note the errors 
in comparison made by Mr, Browne: 

On page 122 of his book Belmore Browne states that he 
found much more snow than did Cook. Granting that, 
how does Mr. Browne explain the fact that in his own 
picture there is no snow at all over that part of the Peak 
which in Dr. Cook's photograph shows a clear outline 
against the sky? 

With a greater depth of snow, why are the rocks in 
Mr. Browne's picture as clear cut as on a sunny summer 
day? 

How does Mr. Browne explain the sharply cut dark 
outline between the snow and rock of his picture? 

How does Mr. Browne explain the three sharp peaks 
on a level with the man's feet, in his picture? 

How does Mr. Browne explain the fact that the man 
in the foreground of his picture is apparently standing 
in snow halfway to his knees, and yet no footprints are 
visible? How could a man walk to the place where he is 
shown in the picture without leaving footprints in the 
snow? In Dr. Cook's photograph the footprints are seen 
all along the line of the "hogback." 

Mr. Browne claims that he photographed his picture 
from exactly the same point as did Cook ; yet Browne is 
looking at the peak or summit in a direction almost at 
right angles to the line of the "hogback," while Cook 
looks at the peak in a direction parallel with and along 
the line of the "hogback" — not across it. 

On page 117 of his book Mr. Browne claims that Dr. 
Cook's camera was pointing upwards. How does Mr. 
Browne explain the fact that Cook's photograph shows 
more below the line of footprints on the "hogback" than 
it does above that line, i. e., a greater depth than eleva- 
tion? In Dr. Cook's picture one looks down a greater dis- 
tance than up; also, one looks down into every footprint 
along the "hogback." Thus the camera was not point- 
ing upwards, as Browne claims. 



On page 346 of his book Mr. Browne says: 

"We had not stood on the top." 

On page 342 he states that during the hist 1000 feet of 
their upward climb, owing to the raging blizzard which 
they encountered, they were unable to read the dials of 
their barometers or distinguish objects. Even the forms 
of their companions were but indistinct blurs. 

With these statements in mind, on what authority does 
Mr. Browne assert that Dr. Cook's close range, detailed 
photograph of the summit is not a view of the summit? 
Since Mr. Browne himself admits that he did not stand 
on the top, and was unable to see anything within 1000 
feet of the top, how does he know what the top looks like? 

Many other points of difference are easily detected, all 
of which expose Mr. Browne's weak, childish attempt to 
palm off his composite picture as a photograph from na- 
ture ; while Dr. Cook's picture is unmistabably a photo- 
graph from nature. 

Thus Belmore Browne and Archdeacon Hudson Stuck 
are both convicted, each on false statements, each on his 
principal picture, by which he sought to convict an inno- 
cent man. 



But what bearing has Mount McKinley on the so-called 
Polar Controversy? 

Why does Belmore Browne entitle a chapter in his 
book "The End of the Polar Controversy"? 

Because thousands of people assert that their only rea- 
son for disbelieving Dr. Cook's claim of Polar discovery 
is the doubt that has been cast on his ascent of Mount 
McKinley; and if his veracity concerning his climb of 
Mount McKinley could be established beyond question, 
they would unhesitatingly accept his claim to the dis- 
covery of the North Pole. 

Until Dr. Cook's return from the North in 1909, his 
truthfulness, honor, scientific ability and attainments 



26 

were unquestioned; indeed Robert E. Peary is quoted as 
publicly saying: 

"If anybody can discover the North Pole, Dr. 
Cook is that man." 

Cook's fortitude and ability while with Peary on his 
Northern trip when he discovered that Greenland was an 
island, so gained the respect and admiration of Peary 
that he made the above statement while on a lecture tour 
of the Southwest, and at various other times. (See New 
York Herald, September 9, 1909, page 4.) 

Not only verbally did Mr. Peary speak in the highest 
terms of Dr. Cook, but in his book "Northward Over the 
Great Ice" he makes personal mention of Dr. Cook (who 
was official surgeon and ethnologist of the expedition) 
eighty-five times ; on page 423, which is especially referred 
to in the index, he pays Dr. Cook the following tribute: 

"To Dr. Cook's care may be attributed the almost 
complete exemption of the party from even the 
mildest indispositions, and personally I owe much 
to his professional skill and unruffled patience and 
coolness in an emergency. In addition to his work 
in his especial ethnological field, in which he has 
obtained a large amount of most valuable material 
concerning a practically unstudied tribe, he was 
always helpful and an indefatigable worker." 

Pages 114 to 121, inclusive, of the above-mentioned 
volume are devoted to Dr. Cook's report of special work 
among the Eskimos, and on page 438, among the recorded 
"Results of the Expedition," Mr. Peary includes the fol- 
lowing : 

"The first complete and accurate information of 
the peculiar and isolated tribe of Arctic High- 
landers, by Dr. Cook." 

Nor was Mr. Peary alone in his high opinion of Dr. 
Cook. Raoul Olivier, a member of the Executive Com- 



27 

mittee of the Belgian Antarctic Expedition of 1897, in an 
interview with a representative of the New York Times 
on September 18th, 1909, expressed the opinion that Bel- 
gian scientists generally had full confidence in Dr. Cook, 
who won the esteem and admiration of the Belgian Com- 
mittee and the Belgica Antarctic Expedition of which he 
was a member, by his quiet and unassuming demeanor, his 
integrity and his determination. 

Prior to Dr. Cook's return from the North in 1909, it 
was universally conceded that he was the first man to 
attain the summit of Mount McKinley. When his de- 
feated rival in the race for the North Pole made his nefa- 
rious attempt to discredit Dr. Cook's Mount McKinley 
ascent, many were convinced, as stated above, that if 
Cook's climb of Mount McKinley could be proven beyond 
question, no further cause would exist to doubt his Polar 
attainment. The crucial problem of Cook's detractors, 
therefore, was to efi:ectually discredit his Mount McKin- 
ley ascent, a problem which they proceeded to meet by 
the most cruel, cowardly and dastardly methods imagin- 
able. The weapons, however, with which Dr. Cook's 
enemies attacked him have proved boomerangs that have 
only served to demolish their own claims ; and Belmore 
Browne and his associate, the pseudo-"Professor" Parker, 
are proven by their own words and pictures to be de- 
liberate and calculating fakers and falsifiers ; while 
Archdeacon Hudson Stuck, to say the least is proven in- 
accurate, unobservant and unreliable; therefore, since 
none of the three — or any other — has produced one iota 
of proof that Dr. Cook did not reach the summit of Mount 
McKinley, but on the contrary, has unwittingly and un- 
willingly corroborated his successful ascent, is it not time 
for the people of this country, and for the representatives 
of the people in the Congress of the United States, to give 
due credit and recognition to Dr. Frederick A. Cook, who 
was actually the first man to conquer Mount McKinley's 
formidable height, and who, by every logical deduction 
of practical reasoning, and by every scientific fact, is 
proven to have been the first man to reach the North Pole. 



28 



Summit of Mt. McKinley, photographically reproduced from Dr. Cook's origi- 
nal photograph published in his book, "To the Top of the Continent," in 1908 : 

1 2 3 4 5 (i 7 8 9 



i 

1 






J i 


1 




" ■•• .'.,■■■■■ 






jjsr" 




! .*^ 


^ iir ^in 






:^Sk 


tSdM 


MMi^l^ 





(Copyright. 190S, l)y F. A. Cook and Harper & Bros.) 

The dividing lines over this picture and the picture on the opposite page repre- 
sent squares and their subdivisions. The lines on each picture are drawn to the 
same scale, and the corresponding lines litar the same letters and num1)ers on 
each i)icture. 

The perpendicular line, ti and (i, and the horizontal line, A and A, touch the 
same fixed objects in each picture. 

Thus : Note divisions F and G, and s and '.» ; in the N. K. corner in Browne's 
picture is distant mountain; in the N. E. corner in Cook's ])icture is foreground 
mountain. 

In Browne's i)icture, distant mountain top goes almost to D. In Cook's pic- 
ture, distant mountain top is just above I*". 

In Browne's picture, rock shows in S. \L corner of 4 and ."). just above A. In 
Cook's picture, although summit is snow-co\ered, neither rock nor snow shows 
in that division. 

In Browne's picture, C to D and 1 to 2, is C()m])letely tilled with solid rock. 
In Cook's picture, sky shows in N. VV. corner of that division. 

In Browne's picture, distant mountain goes into 7 and s ; in Ct)ok's picture, 
distant mountain is visible only after !)th line is passed. 

The above are only a few instances which could be multiplied many times. 
Any one of these, however, is proof that the two pictures are not pictures of 
the same summit or rock. Furthermore, the technique of the two pictures shows 
that Cook's is a photograph from Nature, while Browne's is unquestional)ly a 
laboratory re])roduction. 



29 



This i)icturc is pli(ili\i4r;i])liic-all.\- i^'pnuhuHMl fnun lU'lmnre I'row lu-'s i)icture 
pposite page 1:.':.' of Iiis liook. "'IMk' C\)ii(|iu'st <if Mount McKink'y," I'.n:; : 




15 
C 
U 

E 
F 

G 
H 



Copyright. I'.ii:;, Behiioro Browne. 

Browne asserts that Cook's photograph of the summit of Mt. McKinley is 
not a photograph of the summit. Init was taken in the foothills, 20 miles from 
AIcKinley's highest peak. He also claims that liis own picture, above reproduced, 
was taken at the same spot as was Dr. Cook's photograph, and therefore he 
considers it a "conviction" of Dr. Cook. 

On page 122 Browne states that he found much more snow than did Cook. 
yet in Browne's picture the rocks are as clear cut as on a liright summer day, 
while in his picture there is no snow at all over that part of tlie Peak wliicii in 
Cook's photograph shows a clear outline against the sky. 

In Browne's picture one looks at the Peak or summit in a direction almost at 
right angles to the line of the "hogback." In Cook's picture one looks at the 
peak in a direction parallel with and along the line of the "hogback," not across 
it. The summit in each picture is represented as being from the same point of 
view, but the picture presented 1)y Cook represents a cone or summit with a 
ridge running from the center of the cone "north and south." The picture pre- 
sented liy Browne represents a cone or summit with a ridge running in frout of 
the cone "east and west." The whole toi)ography of the two picture's is different. 



30 



APPENDIX. 

iCopii.) 

PHOTO BROMIDE ENLARGING CO, 

329 Plymouth Court 

CHICAGO 

April 11, 1914. 
Mr. E. C. Rost, 

Chicago, Illinois. 
Dear Sir: 

After a careful examination of the picture opposite 
page 122 of Belmore Brown's book "Conquest of Mount 
McKinley," under which appears the following: 

"The author photographing the Fake Peak. 
Tucker standing where Barrill stood. This view, 
including the author, is used for a special reason. 
As short a time ago as March, 1913, a Geographer 
accused the author of painting (by hand) the views 
of this peak with which we convicted Dr. Cook." 

and also after a careful examination of the 8x10 enlarge- 
ments made from said picture, I am absolutely convinced, 
beyond doubt, that the picture is a retouched reproduction, 
not made from Nature. 

Very truly yours, 

(Signed) J. A. BuRGESS, Mgr. 
State of Illinois, / ss. 

Countij of Cook. \ 

J. A. Burgess, being first duly sworn, deposes and says 
that he has been a commercial photographer by profes- 
sion for fifteen years last past, and can detect a photo- 
graph made from nature, from one not made from na- 
ture ; that the contents of the above letter, signed by him, 
are true. 

(Signed) J. A. BuRGESS. 

Subscribed and sworn to before me this 14th day of 
April, A. D. 1914. 

[SEAL OF (Signed) Frank M. Fairfield, 

notary public] Notary Public. 



COPY OF AFFIDAVIT. 

To WJionisoerer TJits May C())icer}i: 

Refer to Belmore Browne's book, "The Conquest of 
Mount McKinley," published by G. P. Putnam's Sons, 
New York and London, 1913. In Chapter X, headed, 
"The End of the Polar Controversy," facing page 122, are 
two pictures, the upper one of which has the following 
title : 

"The Author Photographing the 'Fake' Peak ; 
Tucker standing where Barrill stood. This view, 
including the author, is used for a special reason. 
As short a time ago as March, 1913, a geographer 
accused the author of painting (by hand) the views 
of this peak, with which we convicted Dr. Cook. 
Photo by H. C. Parker." 

I will stake my professional reputation as an artist and 
a photographer on the statement that the picture referred 
to above, facing page 122 of Belmore Brown's book, is 
faked. It is a drawing made over a photograph. 



In a letter written by H. C. Corbin, Adjutant General 
of the United States Army, to Major General E. S. Otis, 
Commanding Department Pacific, Manila, Philippine Is- 
lands, General Corbin said : 

May 3, 1899. 
<<* * * 'jYik Dearer comes to the Philippines 
for the purpose of making photographic views of 
all objects of interest; and will furnish this office 
with copies of all pictures made. We have already 
a very interesting collection of photographs of 
places of interest in camps, etc., in Cuba and Porto 
Rico. Those made by Mr. Rost excel those of any 
other artist * * *" 

Very sincerely yours, 

(Signed)^ H. C. Corbin, 

Adjutant General. 

Another from the Office of the Chief of Staff, Washing- 
ton, D. C, says: 

"Mr. E. C. Rost: 

I have sent to the Isthmian Canal Commission 



a commendatory letter, recommending you for the 
position of photographer * * *" 

Still another from the Department of the Interior, 
United States Geological Survey, dated October 31, 1904: 
"Mr. E. C. Rost: 

* * * I consider that you have been very suc- 
cessful in overcoming the enormous difficulties in- 
volved in making photographs in the tropics 

Yours truly, 
(Signed) George F. Becker, 

Geologist in Charge. 

A fourth from the National Museum, Smithsonian In- 
stitution, Washington, D. C. : 

"Mr. E. C. Rost: 

* =;•• * You should be able to obtain results of 
much scientific value. Of this I feel certain from 
the many pictures of your making which I have 
seen * * *" 

Very respectfully yours, 

(Signed) Richard Rathbun, 
Assistant Secretary in Charge, 

National Museum. 

I also quote from the Annual Report of the American 
Museum of Natural History, New York City, for 1901 : 

The only way to secure the illustrations which 
our teachers required for lectures was for me to 
send one of our photographers, Mr. Ernest C. Rost, 
entirely around and across that continent (South 
America) * * * 
Signed by 

Albert S. Bickmore, A. M., Ph. D., 

Department of Public Instruction, 
American Museum of Natural History, 
New York City. 

Leslie's Weekly for March 31, 1900, contains an article 
signed "Ernest C. Rost," profusely illustrated with photo- 
graphs of my personal making, and headed: 

"An Artist's Strange Experiences. The First 
Visit that Guam Had Ever Received from a 



83 

Photographer. The Difficulties that 'Leslie's 
Weekly's 'Photographer had to meet and overcome 
in Getting Photographs." 

On the foregoing recommendations, and many others 
which I can furnish, I again make the statement that Mr. 
Browne's picture, referred to above, is a drawing made 
over a photograph. 

The above statement is not made merely for effect, or 
"bluff"; I am willing to go into any court of proper jur- 
isdiction and stand cross-examination on the subject. 

This is a voluntary statement, made by me in the in- 
terests of Truth and Justice ; without consultation with 
or the knowledge of Dr. Frederick A. Cook. 

(Signed) E. C. RoST. 
[notary's seal.] 



P D 



76 




:'^5&'- %/' .*PS- X/ .^m-. '\.^^*' .*} 







A 













,'V'' 


M'. \ 


/ 



-^^ 




9' ."o. '> 














-^ -^^ cy ^ 



' . . ' .0^ 

•^ (-0 ■ 



-^ 


' « <- 


^ ' o 


. « C <fj 


.7^. ' o 


„ :<^ _ ^ -^ 


'"-.^'^ ^v^- 


I 




IRARY BINDING i \ V «^ ~ N" ^ " <l,vP * 

;T 6 9 ,'^ <^ .^^ ^o 

AUGUSTINE • ^o-«.^ ,0^ , • - ' . -^O ^'^' c - ' 



'>t-. ^"^ 



'j^' FLA. 



A 



^ 



^^,^' 
x^^-^. 



